Perspectives: ‘Slam’ suits: Recalling wrestling cases as WWE arrives

As the annual edition of Summer Slam, the professional grappling mid-year showdown of World Wrestling Entertainment (WWE), formerly the WWF, takes place Aug. 1-2 at the U.S. Bank Stadium in Minneapolis, the grappling  has found a foothold in the mainstream  of American sports and entertainment.

Live audiences and cable TV watchers have taken to it, and its stars have crossed over to other venues like football commentary (Seth Rollins, previously Jesse Ventura) and television’s  ”Jeopardy” Becky Lynch (former women’s wrestling champion).

Pro wrestling has been a matter of substantial interest in Minnesota, which for years was a post-World War II hotbed of grappling combined with litigation.

A case decided shortly before the end-of-year holidays in 2025 reflects the interaction of skill and suit, and recalls prior Minnesota wrestling litigation. Some of it was recounted previously here in “Hulk Hogan’s death recalls wrestling cases here” in the Aug. 18, 2025, edition of Minnesota Lawyer, but the new case warrants another look.

Immunity issues

A high school wrestler from Apple Valley High School sued the team’s athletic coach, trainer, the trainer’s employer, the school district, and the referee after the trainer allowed the grappler to continue the bout after the referee stopped it when the youth’s head struck the mat hard in Harvey v. Dudley, 2025 WL 3628478 (Minn. App. Dec. 15, 2025) (nonprecedential). The boy’s claim was based on negligence in allowing him to continue the competition.

After the Hennepin County District Court denied dismissal motions by all four defendants, three of them — the coach, school district and referee — appealed on direct or vicarious official immunity grounds. The Court of Appeals refused to adjudicate the ref’s claim because he failed to “advocate” a defense of official immunity as an independent contractor for the school district, but switched to a new theory that he was an employee of the district, thus pinning him in the case on remand, along with his employer and the trainer.

But the claims against the coach and the district were thrown out of the ring (or not) on grounds of official immunity for the coach in making a “discretionary decision” to permit the contest to continue after clearance by the trainer and that immunity extended to vicarious immunity for the school district as the coach’s employer.

“The art of living is more like wrestling than dancing.”
Roman Emperor Marcus Aurelius (121-180)

*****

“More enduringly than any other sport, wrestling teaches self-control and pride.”
College Olympic champion Dan Gable (1948- )

*****

“Success is like wrestling a gorilla… you don’t quit when you’re tired, you quit when the gorilla is tired.”
Character Actor Robert Strauss (1913-1975)

Concurrent case

Another immunity case was decided concurrently with the Harvey case. In Thormodson v. Zehnder, 30 N.W.3d 807 (Minn. App. Dec. 15, 2025) (nonprecedential), the guardians of a 17-year old sued a school paraprofessional for wrongfully making a false report that the couple engaged in child abuse or child neglect, pursuant to Minn. Stat. §260E.08(d). The Watonwan County District Court in St. James in southern Minnesota dismissed the lawsuit on summary judgment on grounds of statutory immunity under §260E.34(c)(1) for reports based on “good faith.”

The Court of Appeals affirmed. Although there was a delay for more than a day in wording the report from the time the paraprofessional became aware of alleged maltreatment seeing a bruise on the girl, there is no statutory time limit.

The measure, by its terms, applies to any “voluntary report” as well as involuntary ones and the undisputed facts show “good faith” because there was no “ulterior motive” or “malice” and was done for a “proper purpose”.

Wrestling wars

Wrestling lawsuits are not new to Minnesota jurisprudence.

In Ulrich v. Minneapolis Boxing and Wrestling Club, Inc., 129 N.W.2d 288 (1964), an aged spectator at a professional wrestling match sued a referee and promoter for injuries sustained when he was struck by the referee, who was moving from the ring to the dressing room after a match. The Freeborn County District Court jury awarded $20,000 to the fan, but the Supreme Court reversed.

The wrestling program was not culpable because the incident occurred after the spectator grabbed the referee and the promoter had “no duty to keep [the spectator] from touching the referee.” While the promoter could be vicariously liable if the referee was acting within the scope of his employment, the jury was not asked to determine whether there was an employer-employee relationship after the match ended and the referee left the mat. Therefore, the decision was reversed and remanded to determine if the referee was acting in the course of his employment at the time of the incident.

In Ross v. City of Minneapolis, 408 N.W.2d 910 (Minn. Ct. 1987), another fan at a wrestling match was physically assaulted by a fellow spectator as he was leaving the auditorium after the event ended. The promoter and the injured spectator, who lost his right eye, entered into a Miller-Schugart settlement of $500,000, recoverable only against the promoter’s insurer, which denied liability based upon an exclusion of policy for assault and battery.

Perspective Problem: Who was the co-owner of Twin Cities based American Wrestling Association (AWA) with Verne Gagne?

A Hennepin County District Court judge ruled in favor of the spectator, but the Court of Appeals reversed. It held that the “plain language of the policy … clearly excludes from coverage any claims arising out of an assault or battery.”

A settlement paid to an injured wrestler as a workers’ compensation claim before the grappler filed a Chapter 7 bankruptcy was exempt from bankruptcy proceedings in Gagne v. Christian, 172 B.R.50 (D. Minn. 1994). The bankruptcy court had denied an exemption, but U.S. District Court Judge Michael Davis reversed, ruling as a matter of “first impression in Minnesota,” that workers’ compensation benefits received prior to filing a bankruptcy petition are exempt under Minn. Stat. §167.175, subd. 2. Because workers’ compensation was enacted for providing a measure of security for basic needs, the statutory exemption for any claim for compensation owned by an injured employee applies to the pre-petition settlement.

As these cases reflect, immunity may be a vehicle to get a defendant off the ropes in litigation.

Answer: Wally Karbo.

RELATED: More Perspectives columns

PERSPECTIVES POINTERS

Minnesota Amateur Wrestling Icons

Verne Gagne: Gopher NCAA champion and Olympian before pro career

Wally Johnson: Longtime Gophers coach and assistant football coach

J Robinson: Two-time NCAA championship Gopher coach

Brock Lesnar: 2000 NCAA Gopher heavyweight champion, WWE champion, UFC fighter, too 

Gable Steveson: Multiple champion as Gopher, Olympian and 2022 Big Ten Athlete of the Year

Ken Patera: Weightlifting champion and Olympian before pro wrestling career

Marshall H. Tanick is an attorney with the Twin Cities law firm of Meyer, Njus, Tanick, Linder & Robbins, PA.